Log In
Register
5.11pm
31 March 2008
Offline
For those who saw it (it's unavailable here in the UK) could you cast your eyes over this and let me know if anything is incorrect or missing?
Can buy me love! Please consider supporting the Beatles Bible on Amazon
Or buy my paperback/ebook! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
Don't miss The Bowie Bible – now live!
5.21pm
1 May 2010
Offline
Joe said:
For those who saw it (it's unavailable here in the UK) could you cast your eyes over this and let me know if anything is incorrect or missing?
https://www.beatlesbible.com/20…..ight-live/
It's fine, but just a little correction : There were 4 musical sequences : Jet , then Band On The Run , and the final one was supposed to be A Day in Life and Give Peace A Chance . But in the final credits, after Paul Rudd said thanks, instead of the SNL typical ending song, Paul and his band played Get Back which was cut. 
BTW Joe, you didn't mention in the news about Paul's Kennedy Center Awards? 
Edit : Get Back was played while the final credits were running.
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
5.35pm
31 March 2008
Offline Thanks for that. I'll make some amendments.
I didn't cover the Kennedy Center thing, no. Been a bit busy lately. Is it a really big deal? It's sometimes hard to gauge these things.
Can buy me love! Please consider supporting the Beatles Bible on Amazon
Or buy my paperback/ebook! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
Don't miss The Bowie Bible – now live!
6.53pm
5 July 2010
Offline robert said:
I only saw the tribute to John segment and Get Back at the end. I'm finding it hard to feel good about Paul's voice at 69 years. I mean for his age he sings great, however, I wonder if he ought to consider a graceful exit from the stage.
I'm a Beatle fan from 1964 – so I've stuck with them all through the years – and still love 'em.
it's just starting to feel a bit awkward – to me.
I know what you mean. His voice is really wearing out on him. Yes, he does so good for a 68 year old man, but I do honestly think the end is coming soon. However, I really hope he has at least one more U.S. tour before he closes the curtain. I have never seen Paul, and I know that I would dread never being able to see him.
It's hard to come with terms that The Beatles are actually human beings whose voices are going to die eventually.
7.09pm
19 September 2010
Offline I saw Him in August and His voice sounded fine. I think the road isn’t done for his voice and in fact, it sounds better than two years ago
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
7.53pm
1 May 2010
Offline Joe said:
Thanks for that. I'll make some amendments.
I didn't cover the Kennedy Center thing, no. Been a bit busy lately. Is it a really big deal? It's sometimes hard to gauge these things.
Well actually it's one of the biggest cultural honors in US so far I know.
But you're right, Paul getting too many awards reminds me when my sister and I saw Martina Navratilova's winning Wimbledon, my sister said “Another salad bowl for Martina” 
*9*
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
9.48pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline robert said:
I only saw the tribute to John segment and Get Back at the end. I'm finding it hard to feel good about Paul's voice at 69 years. I mean for his age he sings great, however, I wonder if he ought to consider a graceful exit from the stage.
I'm a Beatle fan from 1964 – so I've stuck with them all through the years – and still love 'em.
it's just starting to feel a bit awkward – to me.
His voice did not sound great, but to be honest, the sound quality overall was horrible – it usually is on that show. The only time I watch any of SNL is if they have a musical guest that I care to see because, IMHO, the show has not been funny in over 30 years. Unfortunately, the sound coming from the musical act is always horrible.
If he is live in concert, there are many things that can be done to doctor the sound of his voice. That's probably why everyone keeps saying he sounded better on his latest tour. I wrote a while back that when I saw Dylan about 9 years ago, I couldn't tell if he was singing or talking. Either way, it was a thrill just to be breathing the same air he was! That's why, if the chance ever presents itself, I'd go see Paul in a heartbeat – even if it's 9 years from now. I envy all of you who got the chance to see him last summer or will see him for the upcoming X-mas shows.
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
9.58pm
19 September 2010
Offline Zig said:
robert said:
I only saw the tribute to John segment and Get Back at the end. I'm finding it hard to feel good about Paul's voice at 69 years. I mean for his age he sings great, however, I wonder if he ought to consider a graceful exit from the stage.
I'm a Beatle fan from 1964 – so I've stuck with them all through the years – and still love 'em.
it's just starting to feel a bit awkward – to me.
His voice did not sound great, but to be honest, the sound quality overall was horrible – it usually is on that show. The only time I watch any of SNL is if they have a musical guest that I care to see because, IMHO, the show has not been funny in over 30 years. Unfortunately, the sound coming from the musical act is always horrible.
If he is live in concert, there are many things that can be done to doctor the sound of his voice. That's probably why everyone keeps saying he sounded better on his latest tour. I wrote a while back that when I saw Dylan about 9 years ago, I couldn't tell if he was singing or talking. Either way, it was a thrill just to be breathing the same air he was! That's why, if the chance ever presents itself, I'd go see Paul in a heartbeat – even if it's 9 years from now. I envy all of you who got the chance to see him last summer or will see him for the upcoming X-mas shows.
He Sounded fine in the Clip Joe Posted in his article, but he sounded better in tour.
*9*
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
11.32pm
19 April 2010
Offline OK – so here's where I fall of some Christmas lists – I saw Paul live in 1990 at RFK in DC and he was amazing – totally in voice.
i saw him again live in 2006 in DC and was shocked at the difference. Ever since I have noticed the deteriotion of his voice over the years. Getting a bit throatier every year.
I saw Paul on TV at the White House, at the awards ceremony, on Jimmy Kimmel a coupla nights before SNL and then SNL – I'm not sure how anyone can deny his voice is aging and as with everyone who ages – it's not holding up – it's a pure and simple fact – and it is thrilling to have Paul alive – in any condition.
And I'll repeat compared to other 68 year olds, his voice is great. Again, I only hope he'll exit the stage gracefully.
I love him – always have, always will.
"She looks more like him than I do."
12.53am
13 November 2009
Offline I blame SNL.
Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo! So little time! So much to know!
1.06am
1 May 2010
Offline robert said:
OK – so here's where I fall of some Christmas lists
Not at all. I think you're very honest to say it. Maybe I love the Beatles too much to find amazing a bad performance. Or I'd take any day Paul's current voice to any other crappy singer that's around.
(Skye : I love your signature!!)
Here comes the sun….. Scoobie-doobie……
Something in the way she moves…..attracts me like a cauliflower…
Bop. Bop, cat bop. Go, Johnny, Go.
Beware of Darkness…
12.13pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline robert said:
OK – so here's where I fall of some Christmas lists
You're still on mine – for whatever that's worth.
I don't think anyone is disagreeing with you. We are pretty much making various degrees of the same point. There's no denying his voice is not what it used to be – neither is mine and I'm 21 years younger than he.
My point was that any small setting such as the ones you mentioned exposes that fact even more. I'd be willing to bet my house that if you saw him in 1990 on TV or any other “close” setting, he would have sounded far worse than he did when you saw him live in DC. That goes for just about anybody, no?
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
12.36pm
19 April 2010
Offline Well, thanks for the grace from everyone – and I'll be looking for those Christmas gifts!
And I agree that a close setting such as TV will expose any weaknesses even more. And to his credit, his playing is still amazing – if not even getting better (a little better all the time!).
"She looks more like him than I do."
5.54pm
31 March 2008
Offline When Paul had trouble recording the lead vocals for Oh! Darling in 1969 he said something to the effect of “When I was younger I could do this in no time at all.” *That*’s when the decline began, then.
Can buy me love! Please consider supporting the Beatles Bible on Amazon
Or buy my paperback/ebook! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
Don't miss The Bowie Bible – now live!
6.00pm
9 June 2010
Offline 
mithveaen said:
(Skye : I love your signature!!)
(So do I!)
If I seem to act unkind, it's only me, it's not my mind that is confusing things.
8.54pm
19 April 2010
Offline Joe said:
When Paul had trouble recording the lead vocals for Oh! Darling in 1969 he said something to the effect of “When I was younger I could do this in no time at all.” *That*'s when the decline began, then.
good point, Joe. And if that's decline, I'll take it.
"She looks more like him than I do."
10.49pm
14 December 2009
Offline Yeah, I wouldn't have any ill will for anyone who thinks his voice is in decline OR anyone who thinks he's as great as ever. If you still like the way he sings, more power to you! And if you're disheartened by the deterioration, just accept that it's natural and unavoidable. And think of how great he's been in the past.
Paul: Yeah well… first of all, we’re bringing out a ‘Stamp Out Detroit’ campaign.
11.49pm
19 September 2010
Offline Von Bontee said:
Yeah, I wouldn't have any ill will for anyone who thinks his voice is in decline OR anyone who thinks he's as great as ever. If you still like the way he sings, more power to you! And if you're disheartened by the deterioration, just accept that it's natural and unavoidable. And think of how great he's been in the past.
Sanity of The Highest Level. Congrats Von, You are getting an apple
As if it matters how a man falls down.'
'When the fall's all that's left, it matters a great deal.
2.24am
13 November 2009
Offline MeanMrs.Mustard said:
mithveaen said:
(Skye : I love your signature!!)
(So do I!)
(Thank you!)
Zig said:
My point was that any small setting such as the ones you mentioned exposes that fact even more. I'd be willing to bet my house that if you saw him in 1990 on TV or any other “close” setting, he would have sounded far worse than he did when you saw him live in DC. That goes for just about anybody, no?
But why? Is it the lack of crowd noise to cover it up? A failure to adapt to a smaller stage's acoustics? Gremlins? 
I can accept that he's old (sigh) and can't hit all of the notes he used to. In my mind the difference between this performance and what I heard in March is a world tour.
Ad hoc, ad loc, and quid pro quo! So little time! So much to know!
2.24pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline skye said:
Zig said:
My point was that any small setting such as the ones you mentioned exposes that fact even more. I'd be willing to bet my house that if you saw him in 1990 on TV or any other “close” setting, he would have sounded far worse than he did when you saw him live in DC. That goes for just about anybody, no?
But why? Is it the lack of crowd noise to cover it up? A failure to adapt to a smaller stage's acoustics? Gremlins?
I can accept that he's old (sigh) and can't hit all of the notes he used to. In my mind the difference between this performance and what I heard in March is a world tour.
To answer your questions – yes, yes and gremlins?!?!
I lean more towards the acoustics. We all know he can't hit those high notes – that's a sad-but-true fact of life. In a large concert setting, you can definitely hear that. However, in a smaller setting without all of the crowd noise and without the sound bouncing around the arena, it is exposed even more. I recall Paul joking around at the White House gig something along the lines of wanting to do regular performances there because the acoustics were so good. I thought, “be careful what you ask for big guy”.
Joe's point of Paul kinda losing the ability to hit those notes as far back as the late 60's was kinda depressing wasn't it?
To the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
